I started posting on HowieinSeattle in 11/04, following progressive American politics in the spirit of Howard Dean's effort to "Take Our Country Back." I decided to follow my heart and posted on seattleforbarackobama from 2/07 to 11/08.--"Howie Martin is the Abe Linkin' of progressive Seattle."--Michael Hood.

Friday, June 15, 2012

Greg Sargent: "The Morning Plum: The GOP plan to replace Obamacare with ..."

With a ruling set for as soon as next week on
Obamacare, both sides are busily preparing for the ferocious spin war
that will erupt in the wake of the decision. I’m not one who believes
there’s any silver lining for Dems in a decision against the law — it
could help reinforce the narrative that Obama allowed himself to get
distracted from the economy with nothing to show for it.
But it’s still fair to ask whether such a decision would also put
more pressure on Republicans to explain what, exactly, they would
replace health reform with, and what they’d do for those who’d be
stranded if the law is voided. And so this nugget buried in today’s New York Times piece on the coming public relations battle is pretty interesting:

After a repeal vote, Republicans plan to first let the dust
settle. Then ... they would move forward incrementally with bills to
allow the purchase of insurance across state lines, to loosen
restrictions on consumers wishing to change insurers, and to bolster
tax-preferred health savings accounts. When several Republican lawmakers
suggested popular parts of the health care law would be maintained,
conservatives loudly revolted....

A senior Republican House aide said it was up to the White House, not
Republicans, to produce a contingency plan for those left behind by a
court invalidation, like the thousands of sick people or consumers with
pre-existing conditions in new federally backed high-risk pools.

This obviously is not great sourcing, and could definitely use some
more reporting. But if Republicans have decided that their argument will
be that it’s all on the White House to come up with another plan for
the sick and for those with preexisting conditions, that seems pretty
newsworthy. After all, Mitt Romney’s campaign has now gone on record admitting
something similar: His plan would only guarantee coverage to people
with preexisting conditions if they’ve had constant, continuous coverage
in the past.
Again, a decision against the health law — which seems very possible,
or even likely — would be terrible for Dems. But the provision barring
discrimination against those with preexisting conditions is very
popular. And if it becomes clear that the GOP sees no obligation to
replace that provision, it could clarify the choice this fall in new
ways and play unpredictably during the campaign. MORE...